VWC Newsletter - July 1994
Mount Pleasant Bill Moves Ahead
by Ernie Dickerman
Before the end of July it is expected that the Mount Pleasant National Scenic Area bill, H.R. 2942, will be reported by the House Agriculture Committee, complete with all of Rep. Goodlatte's promised amendments. The next step will be for the bill to move to the floor of the House of Representatives to be voted on. Whether this step will occur before Congress takes its usual month of August recess or not til it returns is beyond human prediction, the Congress being a law exclusively unto itself. From our point of view, the sooner the better!
This progress is significantly due to the strong, steady support for the bill which Virginians everywhere have displayed and especially so by the residents of Amherst County and its Board of Supervisors, where the approximately 8,000 acre Mount Pleasant area is located on the east side of the Blue Ridge in the George Washington National Forest. Most commendable and effective have been the skill and diligence of Congressman Bob Goodlatte and his aide Rob Van Renterghem in building support for the bill within the House and of Senators John Warner and Charles Robb. In the House not only all of Virginia's Congresspersons are co-sponsors of this H.R. 2942, but also an additional 34 other House members are co-sponsors -- an extraordinary number, 44 total, for a wilderness protection bill.
On May 23, Senators Warner and Robb jointly introduced the Mount Pleasant National Scenic Area bill in the Senate, as S. 2142, with language essentially the same as in the House bill and including all of Mr. Goodlatte's amendments. We express our full thanks to the Senators for their prompt action in filing the Senate bill soon after the April hearing by the House Agriculture Committee. No visible movement of the Senate bill is expected until after passage of the House bill.
Meanwhile, please write, FAX or telephone Senators John Warner and Charles Robb (address U. S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510), thanking them for introducing the Senate bill and encouraging each to act to get this Mount Pleasant bill, S. 2142, approved by the Senate promptly. This is the way to keep our momentum rolling and to win in 1994!
Laurel Fork Area vs. Thornwood Gas Proposed Pipeline
by Ernie Dickerman
The Virginia Wilderness Committee, from its founding in 1969, has constantly viewed the 10,000 acre Laurel Fork as a potential candidate for wilderness protection under the Wilderness Act. of 1964. Persistent opposition from native-born residents of Highland County, Virginia, where Laurel Fork is located on the George Washington National Forest, has long stymied this objective. Meanwhile, active demand for protection of Laurel Fork throughout the Commonwealth and by a sufficient number of Highland County residents had induced the Forest Service to let nature be dominant and to refrain from logging, roadbuilding, and any other development. Laurel Fork is officially a "Special Management Area", not to be treated as usual national forest land.
But here in 1994 has risen the sort of long expected threat to the beauty, the wildlife, the free-flowing, trout-breeding streams, and other special natural qualities of the 10,000 acre Laurel Fork area. A private company, Thornwood Gas Inc. of Bradford, Pennsylvania, wants to build a pipeline through the Monongahela National Forest in West Virginia to connect six capped gas wells (drilled in the 1960's but remote from any existing pipeline, so never producing) to an existing gas pipeline outside the forest and so make possible the sale of gas from the presently capped wells. Some five miles of the 32-mile long proposed pipeline would be built along Forest Road 106, the boundary of the Laurel Fork area where it adjoins the Monongahela Forest on the west, making it probable that sooner or later Thornwood Gas Inc. will want to begin drilling for gas in Laurel Fork, with all the continuing disruption in the way of drilling, building of roads, motor vehicle operation and continued maintenance that such commercial development would bring. Gone would be the peace, the quiet beauty, the sense of remoteness now known in Laurel Fork by humans and by wildlife.
Three acute elements are worth noting about this Laurel Fork vs. the proposed gas pipeline issue. First, while there are no gas wells whatsoever in Laurel Fork, over 90% of the 10,000 acres are covered by existing mineral leases -- leases held by other parties probably willing to cooperate with Thornwood Gas in developing the area. Second, Laurel Fork is 15% of the same geologic gas field (called Horton) that lies in the adjacent Monongahela Forest suggesting the same potential for producing gas. Third, the management prescription for Laurel Fork Special Management Area does not forbid development of mineral resources, including gas; indeed, the prescription reads, "The area encompasses significant biological, recreational and mineral values that can be managed harmoniously to provide special benefits to the public." Does anybody outside the Forest Service really believe that commodity exploitation, especially of minerals, can occur without seriously damaging the natural values of that area?
Both Virginians and West Virginians as individuals and through such organizations as the Sierra Club and the Friends of Laurel Fork have mounted opposition to this proposed pipeline with its present routing, both as it would affect Laurel Fork and within the Monongahela Forest. When the Monongahela and George Washington Forests jointly issued in January 1994 their Scoping Notice formally announcing Thornwood Gas' application for a permit to build the proposed pipeline, numerous parties responded objecting to the pipeline; so much so that the Forest Service realizes it has a serious problem on its hands requiring intensive study and producing at least an Environmental Assessment, maybe even an Environmental Impact Statement, which will take several months yet to prepare.
In fighting the proposed pipeline, concerned organizations have decided that expert testimony will be necessary to counteract the Forest Service EA or EIS and to file an effective suit if needed later. Accordingly, a search is being made for a geologist with the appropriate background and experience to study the project. A fund of $5,000 is to be raised. The Virginia Chapter of Sierra Club has pledged $1,000. Because of its long-time, deep concern to keep Laurel Fork like it is -- not to be changed by the works of man -- at its annual meeting on July 9, 1994, the members of the VWC voted to commit $500 to this fund -- recognizably a very large sum for us, but justified by what is at stake. It is expected that later legal counsel and action will be provided voluntarily by the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund and the Southern Environmental Law Center (Charlottesville, VA).
You may want to inform yourself more particularly about this proposed pipeline project. The simplest way is to write the Monongahela Forest at the following address, requesting a copy of the Scoping Notice dated January 5, 1994, the accompanying statement of Thornwood Gas and a map showing the route of the proposed pipeline: address Monongahela National Forest, c/o Ms. Linda Tracy, 200 Sycamore St., Elkins, WV 26241. While the deadline for officially responding to the Scoping Notice is long past, if you are willing to add your weight in this fight to protect Laurel Fork, write your own letter to the above address stating your concerns about the project. It will be one more citizen's voice influencing the Forest Service' ultimate decision and assuring their thorough consideration of the pro's and con's of this questionable project.
Eliminating this threat to the extraordinary, wonderful character of the 10,000 acre Laurel Fork area at this early stage is more apt to be successful than later with the pipeline in place along adjacent Forest Road 106 and Thornwood Gas eager to drill wells and build connecting pipelines everywhere in Laurel Fork. Let's turn them back NOW!
U.S. House of Representatives Urges Forest Service to Stay out of Roadless Areas
by Lynn Cameron
When the U.S. House of Representatives passed the FY 1995 Interior Appropriations bill on June 23, 1994, it urged the Forest Service to avoid entry into roadless areas. The Interior Appropriations Subcommittee included the following language in the Committee Report accompanying the bill:
The Committee is concerned about the potential impacts of building roads into previously roadless areas...These areas...provide...some of the last reservoirs of ecological diversity, and prime opportunities for restoring ecological health and integrity to forest lands. Therefore, the Committee directs the Forest Service to avoid to the greatest extent possible entry into these roadless areas, and to explore all other options for making timber available before proceeding to new road construction in these areas. The Forest Service should include in its 1996 budget a specific breakdown of all roadless areas planned for entry in the 1996 program, with a justification for each such planned entry.
While this advice is not binding, the U.S. Representatives have given a clear indication of their concern for protecting the wild character of roadless areas on National Forest land.
Report of Annual VWC Meeting
by Lynn Cameron
The agenda for the July 9, 1994 annual meeting of the VWC, held at Harrisonburg, was full of important items relating to wilderness, wildlife, park, and forest issues in Virginia. A number of these issues are reported fully in articles in the newsletter.
by Lynn Cameron
The Forest Service seems to be going out of its way to destroy the wild character of roadless areas in the George Washington National Forest. It is becoming increasingly obvious that the 1993 GWNF Forest Plan does not provide the protection for roadless areas that we had hoped for. Forest Watch members, please be especially attentive to scoping notices you receive for your Ranger District. We have heard rumors that we can expect more invasion into roadless areas from one end of the GWNF to the other. We need to respond to all objectionable activities during the month-long comment period after a scoping notice for a proposed activity is issued by the Forest Service.
Briery Branch Helicopter Salvage Sale (in Little River Roadless Area) This proposed salvage sale was put on hold by the Forest Service until the 1994 gypsy moth defoliation could be assessed. VWC members who walked through the area in late June observed very light defoliation in spots. From Route 924, the canopy of the sale area looked full, green, and healthy. Apparently, the severe defoliation expected by the Forest Service did not occur. Nevertheless, Jim Sitton, Chief Timber Officer of the GWNF, stated that the Forest Service plans to go ahead with the sale in Feb. or March of 1995 if they find sufficient egg masses in the area this fall. Mr. Sitton expects extensive defoliation next year and wants to recover the economic value of the trees before the defoliation occurs. This salvage sale was appealed by the VWC, Sierra Club, and The Wilderness Society. The appeal was denied. The Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund is considering legal action if the Forest Service decides to proceed with the sale.
Five-Wood Timber Sale (Little Allegheny Roadless Area) The Sierra Club appealed this sale, but the Forest Supervisor's decision to cut was upheld. No legal action will be taken on this.
Heliport Contruction (Southern Massanutten Roadless Area) The heliport was constructed illegally in a roadless area in clear violation of NEPA and the National Historic Preservation Act. The bulldozed clearing contained a large archeological site, which was destroyed, a popular campsite, and possibly an endangered species (variable sedge), which is known to be located in the area. Some members of the Forest Watch group have visited the area and written letters.
Thornwood Gas Pipeline Proposal (Laurel Fork Roadless Area) The proposed $4 million pipeline would extend 32 miles through sections of the Monongahela and George Washington National Forests, threatening to open up Laurel Fork to gas development. In June, several members of the Forest Watch group toured the proposed route with Linda Tracy, the geologist in charge of the project, and other Forest Service personnel.
West Dry Branch Timber Sale (Elliott Knob and Crawford Mountain Roadless Areas) This timber sale involves road construction and timber harvest in two roadless areas. The Southern Environmental Law Center filed an appeal on behalf of the VWC and other environmental groups. The appeal was dismissed on the grounds that it was filed late. The SELC was informed incorrectly of the deadline by the Deerfield Ranger District. SELC sent a letter asking the Regional Forester to reconsider the dismissal in view of the circumstances. We are waiting for his response.
Heliport Illegally Built in GWNF Roadless Area
by Lynn Cameron
In early June, VWC Forest Watch activists discovered an approximately 3-acre bulldozed clearing in the GWNF Southern Massanutten Roadless Area. According to the Forest Service, the purpose of the clearing, which was built illegally this spring, was to provide a heliport where helicopters used for gypsy moth spraying could be loaded. Unfortunately, the bulldozing was done in an area that contains an endangered species (variable sedge), a large archeological site, and a popular camping site. The Forest Service in consultation with the Natural Heritage Program was planning to do a prescribed burn of a 1000-acre area in which the clearing is located to improve habitat for the variable sedge known to be there. It would be nearly impossible to determine whether any of the sedges were destroyed since the clearing has been skinned off and reseeded. A thorough search of the piles of debris dozed to the side would be very difficult. The archeological site located in the clearing was completely destroyed, a tragic loss of the historic record. The popular campsite located in a small wildlife opening was obliterated.
The Lee District Ranger authorized the dozing of the clearing without complying with the National Historic Preservation Act or the National Environmental Policy Act, which requires the Forest Service to issue a scoping notice to elicit public response and to conduct an environmental evaluation to make sure there are no biological or historic resources in the area. The management plan for the GWNF states that Southern Massanutten Roadless Area should be managed as Remote Highlands, where the forest "can be maintained in a near-natural state" with "light-on-the-land management activities". The Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club sent a letter to Forest Supervisor Wayne Kelley asking for an explanation of how "this egregious violation of the law and of the management plan occurred" and asking for assurance that this type of illegal action will not happen again in the GWNF. While the Forest Service did respond by phone and mail, there is still no clear indication that the problem has been properly addressed.
This is not the first instance of a District Ranger failing to comply with NEPA in a roadless area. In 1991, the Dry River Ranger authorized volunteers to clear a 1 1/2 mile overgrown logging road in the Skidmore Fork Roadless Area while the area was being evaluated for its wilderness potential. In another case, the Dry River Ranger allowed hang gliders to clear a take-off point about an acre in size at the top of Reddish Knob. This clearing was done in a biologically sensitive area where the endangered cow knob salamander is found; once again, no scoping notice was sent out, and NEPA was violated.
State Bear Management Policy Questioned by Sierra Club
by Lynn Cameron
A concern for the population status of black bears in Virginia has prompted the Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club to write to the Virginia Dept. of Game and Inland Fisheries asking for "immediate action to substantially reduce and effectively limit the legal kill of black bears". There are a number of causes for alarm concerning the long-term viability of black bears in Virginia:
Membership
Membership in the VWC is open to anyone who believes in the need for preservation of wilderness. To join, send a copy of a recent letter supporting wilderness written to a public official, OR send $5.00 or more per year to the VWC Treasurer, address below. Thank you.The date opposite your name on the mailing label indicates when (month & year) you last made a contribution to VWC. Please check it and if the date is more than one year old, a new contribution from you will be warmly welcomed.
Officers
PRESIDENT Lynn Cameron 95 Hope St., Harrisonburg, VA 22801 (703) 434-1318
VICE PRES Dan French 107 Merry Acres Dr., Madison Heights, VA 24572 (703) 845-1605
TREASURER Julie Simpson P.O. 11 E Monmouth, Winchester, VA 22601-4647 (703) 662-7043
SECRETARY Charles Pierce 211 Evening Lane, Winchester, VA 22603 (703) 667-3184
by Ernie Dickerman
Before the end of July it is expected that the Mount Pleasant National Scenic Area bill, H.R. 2942, will be reported by the House Agriculture Committee, complete with all of Rep. Goodlatte's promised amendments. The next step will be for the bill to move to the floor of the House of Representatives to be voted on. Whether this step will occur before Congress takes its usual month of August recess or not til it returns is beyond human prediction, the Congress being a law exclusively unto itself. From our point of view, the sooner the better!
This progress is significantly due to the strong, steady support for the bill which Virginians everywhere have displayed and especially so by the residents of Amherst County and its Board of Supervisors, where the approximately 8,000 acre Mount Pleasant area is located on the east side of the Blue Ridge in the George Washington National Forest. Most commendable and effective have been the skill and diligence of Congressman Bob Goodlatte and his aide Rob Van Renterghem in building support for the bill within the House and of Senators John Warner and Charles Robb. In the House not only all of Virginia's Congresspersons are co-sponsors of this H.R. 2942, but also an additional 34 other House members are co-sponsors -- an extraordinary number, 44 total, for a wilderness protection bill.
On May 23, Senators Warner and Robb jointly introduced the Mount Pleasant National Scenic Area bill in the Senate, as S. 2142, with language essentially the same as in the House bill and including all of Mr. Goodlatte's amendments. We express our full thanks to the Senators for their prompt action in filing the Senate bill soon after the April hearing by the House Agriculture Committee. No visible movement of the Senate bill is expected until after passage of the House bill.
Meanwhile, please write, FAX or telephone Senators John Warner and Charles Robb (address U. S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510), thanking them for introducing the Senate bill and encouraging each to act to get this Mount Pleasant bill, S. 2142, approved by the Senate promptly. This is the way to keep our momentum rolling and to win in 1994!
Laurel Fork Area vs. Thornwood Gas Proposed Pipeline
by Ernie Dickerman
The Virginia Wilderness Committee, from its founding in 1969, has constantly viewed the 10,000 acre Laurel Fork as a potential candidate for wilderness protection under the Wilderness Act. of 1964. Persistent opposition from native-born residents of Highland County, Virginia, where Laurel Fork is located on the George Washington National Forest, has long stymied this objective. Meanwhile, active demand for protection of Laurel Fork throughout the Commonwealth and by a sufficient number of Highland County residents had induced the Forest Service to let nature be dominant and to refrain from logging, roadbuilding, and any other development. Laurel Fork is officially a "Special Management Area", not to be treated as usual national forest land.
But here in 1994 has risen the sort of long expected threat to the beauty, the wildlife, the free-flowing, trout-breeding streams, and other special natural qualities of the 10,000 acre Laurel Fork area. A private company, Thornwood Gas Inc. of Bradford, Pennsylvania, wants to build a pipeline through the Monongahela National Forest in West Virginia to connect six capped gas wells (drilled in the 1960's but remote from any existing pipeline, so never producing) to an existing gas pipeline outside the forest and so make possible the sale of gas from the presently capped wells. Some five miles of the 32-mile long proposed pipeline would be built along Forest Road 106, the boundary of the Laurel Fork area where it adjoins the Monongahela Forest on the west, making it probable that sooner or later Thornwood Gas Inc. will want to begin drilling for gas in Laurel Fork, with all the continuing disruption in the way of drilling, building of roads, motor vehicle operation and continued maintenance that such commercial development would bring. Gone would be the peace, the quiet beauty, the sense of remoteness now known in Laurel Fork by humans and by wildlife.
Three acute elements are worth noting about this Laurel Fork vs. the proposed gas pipeline issue. First, while there are no gas wells whatsoever in Laurel Fork, over 90% of the 10,000 acres are covered by existing mineral leases -- leases held by other parties probably willing to cooperate with Thornwood Gas in developing the area. Second, Laurel Fork is 15% of the same geologic gas field (called Horton) that lies in the adjacent Monongahela Forest suggesting the same potential for producing gas. Third, the management prescription for Laurel Fork Special Management Area does not forbid development of mineral resources, including gas; indeed, the prescription reads, "The area encompasses significant biological, recreational and mineral values that can be managed harmoniously to provide special benefits to the public." Does anybody outside the Forest Service really believe that commodity exploitation, especially of minerals, can occur without seriously damaging the natural values of that area?
Both Virginians and West Virginians as individuals and through such organizations as the Sierra Club and the Friends of Laurel Fork have mounted opposition to this proposed pipeline with its present routing, both as it would affect Laurel Fork and within the Monongahela Forest. When the Monongahela and George Washington Forests jointly issued in January 1994 their Scoping Notice formally announcing Thornwood Gas' application for a permit to build the proposed pipeline, numerous parties responded objecting to the pipeline; so much so that the Forest Service realizes it has a serious problem on its hands requiring intensive study and producing at least an Environmental Assessment, maybe even an Environmental Impact Statement, which will take several months yet to prepare.
In fighting the proposed pipeline, concerned organizations have decided that expert testimony will be necessary to counteract the Forest Service EA or EIS and to file an effective suit if needed later. Accordingly, a search is being made for a geologist with the appropriate background and experience to study the project. A fund of $5,000 is to be raised. The Virginia Chapter of Sierra Club has pledged $1,000. Because of its long-time, deep concern to keep Laurel Fork like it is -- not to be changed by the works of man -- at its annual meeting on July 9, 1994, the members of the VWC voted to commit $500 to this fund -- recognizably a very large sum for us, but justified by what is at stake. It is expected that later legal counsel and action will be provided voluntarily by the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund and the Southern Environmental Law Center (Charlottesville, VA).
You may want to inform yourself more particularly about this proposed pipeline project. The simplest way is to write the Monongahela Forest at the following address, requesting a copy of the Scoping Notice dated January 5, 1994, the accompanying statement of Thornwood Gas and a map showing the route of the proposed pipeline: address Monongahela National Forest, c/o Ms. Linda Tracy, 200 Sycamore St., Elkins, WV 26241. While the deadline for officially responding to the Scoping Notice is long past, if you are willing to add your weight in this fight to protect Laurel Fork, write your own letter to the above address stating your concerns about the project. It will be one more citizen's voice influencing the Forest Service' ultimate decision and assuring their thorough consideration of the pro's and con's of this questionable project.
Eliminating this threat to the extraordinary, wonderful character of the 10,000 acre Laurel Fork area at this early stage is more apt to be successful than later with the pipeline in place along adjacent Forest Road 106 and Thornwood Gas eager to drill wells and build connecting pipelines everywhere in Laurel Fork. Let's turn them back NOW!
U.S. House of Representatives Urges Forest Service to Stay out of Roadless Areas
by Lynn Cameron
When the U.S. House of Representatives passed the FY 1995 Interior Appropriations bill on June 23, 1994, it urged the Forest Service to avoid entry into roadless areas. The Interior Appropriations Subcommittee included the following language in the Committee Report accompanying the bill:
The Committee is concerned about the potential impacts of building roads into previously roadless areas...These areas...provide...some of the last reservoirs of ecological diversity, and prime opportunities for restoring ecological health and integrity to forest lands. Therefore, the Committee directs the Forest Service to avoid to the greatest extent possible entry into these roadless areas, and to explore all other options for making timber available before proceeding to new road construction in these areas. The Forest Service should include in its 1996 budget a specific breakdown of all roadless areas planned for entry in the 1996 program, with a justification for each such planned entry.
While this advice is not binding, the U.S. Representatives have given a clear indication of their concern for protecting the wild character of roadless areas on National Forest land.
Report of Annual VWC Meeting
by Lynn Cameron
The agenda for the July 9, 1994 annual meeting of the VWC, held at Harrisonburg, was full of important items relating to wilderness, wildlife, park, and forest issues in Virginia. A number of these issues are reported fully in articles in the newsletter.
- Treasurer's Report Ending balance as of July 8 - $3032.30. (A special thanks to all the VWC members who contributed so generously!)
- Mount Pleasant Ernie Dickerman gave a status report on the Mount Pleasant National Scenic Area bill (full report on p. 1).
- Laurel Fork Ernie reported on the proposed gas pipeline next to the Laurel Fork area. VWC members unanimously voted to contribute $500 toward a geological consultant to study the project. A detailed report is given on page 2.
- Shenandoah National Park Charles Pierce discussed changes occurring in Shenandoah National Park, including administrative reorganization and development of a "friends" group. The Park continues to be a matter of concern to VWC members for a number of reasons: encroaching development, declining air quality and visibility, acid rain, and overuse, all of which adversely affect Wilderness in the Park.
- Black bears Chris Bolgiano gave a full report on problems faced by black bears in Virginia. Problems discussed include the Virginia chase season, effects of gypsy moth on food supply, loss of habitat due to development, high-tech hunting, and overhunting. Loss of wilderness habitat directly threatens a sustainable bear population. The VWC voted to contribute $150 to the 5-year Allegheny Bear Study being undertaken by the Game Commission. This study will provide valuable information that can be used for management decisions. See a related article on page 7.
- Southern Massanutten Roadless Area Lynn Cameron reported on an unfortunate event which occurred in the SMRA, where the District Ranger authorized construction of a heliport, destroying a large archeological site and critical habitat of an endangered species. See page 6 for details.
- Forest Watch Lynn also reported that the Forest Watch group has been very active this year, covering all six ranger districts and keeping a watchful eye on any infringements in roadless areas that have potential for future wilderness designation (page 5).
- Election of officers A slate of nominees for VWC offices was presented by Bess Murray. The following were elected to serve: Lynn Cameron, President; Dan French, Vice President; Charles Pierce, Secretary; Juliana Simpson, Treasurer.
by Lynn Cameron
The Forest Service seems to be going out of its way to destroy the wild character of roadless areas in the George Washington National Forest. It is becoming increasingly obvious that the 1993 GWNF Forest Plan does not provide the protection for roadless areas that we had hoped for. Forest Watch members, please be especially attentive to scoping notices you receive for your Ranger District. We have heard rumors that we can expect more invasion into roadless areas from one end of the GWNF to the other. We need to respond to all objectionable activities during the month-long comment period after a scoping notice for a proposed activity is issued by the Forest Service.
Briery Branch Helicopter Salvage Sale (in Little River Roadless Area) This proposed salvage sale was put on hold by the Forest Service until the 1994 gypsy moth defoliation could be assessed. VWC members who walked through the area in late June observed very light defoliation in spots. From Route 924, the canopy of the sale area looked full, green, and healthy. Apparently, the severe defoliation expected by the Forest Service did not occur. Nevertheless, Jim Sitton, Chief Timber Officer of the GWNF, stated that the Forest Service plans to go ahead with the sale in Feb. or March of 1995 if they find sufficient egg masses in the area this fall. Mr. Sitton expects extensive defoliation next year and wants to recover the economic value of the trees before the defoliation occurs. This salvage sale was appealed by the VWC, Sierra Club, and The Wilderness Society. The appeal was denied. The Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund is considering legal action if the Forest Service decides to proceed with the sale.
Five-Wood Timber Sale (Little Allegheny Roadless Area) The Sierra Club appealed this sale, but the Forest Supervisor's decision to cut was upheld. No legal action will be taken on this.
Heliport Contruction (Southern Massanutten Roadless Area) The heliport was constructed illegally in a roadless area in clear violation of NEPA and the National Historic Preservation Act. The bulldozed clearing contained a large archeological site, which was destroyed, a popular campsite, and possibly an endangered species (variable sedge), which is known to be located in the area. Some members of the Forest Watch group have visited the area and written letters.
Thornwood Gas Pipeline Proposal (Laurel Fork Roadless Area) The proposed $4 million pipeline would extend 32 miles through sections of the Monongahela and George Washington National Forests, threatening to open up Laurel Fork to gas development. In June, several members of the Forest Watch group toured the proposed route with Linda Tracy, the geologist in charge of the project, and other Forest Service personnel.
West Dry Branch Timber Sale (Elliott Knob and Crawford Mountain Roadless Areas) This timber sale involves road construction and timber harvest in two roadless areas. The Southern Environmental Law Center filed an appeal on behalf of the VWC and other environmental groups. The appeal was dismissed on the grounds that it was filed late. The SELC was informed incorrectly of the deadline by the Deerfield Ranger District. SELC sent a letter asking the Regional Forester to reconsider the dismissal in view of the circumstances. We are waiting for his response.
Heliport Illegally Built in GWNF Roadless Area
by Lynn Cameron
In early June, VWC Forest Watch activists discovered an approximately 3-acre bulldozed clearing in the GWNF Southern Massanutten Roadless Area. According to the Forest Service, the purpose of the clearing, which was built illegally this spring, was to provide a heliport where helicopters used for gypsy moth spraying could be loaded. Unfortunately, the bulldozing was done in an area that contains an endangered species (variable sedge), a large archeological site, and a popular camping site. The Forest Service in consultation with the Natural Heritage Program was planning to do a prescribed burn of a 1000-acre area in which the clearing is located to improve habitat for the variable sedge known to be there. It would be nearly impossible to determine whether any of the sedges were destroyed since the clearing has been skinned off and reseeded. A thorough search of the piles of debris dozed to the side would be very difficult. The archeological site located in the clearing was completely destroyed, a tragic loss of the historic record. The popular campsite located in a small wildlife opening was obliterated.
The Lee District Ranger authorized the dozing of the clearing without complying with the National Historic Preservation Act or the National Environmental Policy Act, which requires the Forest Service to issue a scoping notice to elicit public response and to conduct an environmental evaluation to make sure there are no biological or historic resources in the area. The management plan for the GWNF states that Southern Massanutten Roadless Area should be managed as Remote Highlands, where the forest "can be maintained in a near-natural state" with "light-on-the-land management activities". The Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club sent a letter to Forest Supervisor Wayne Kelley asking for an explanation of how "this egregious violation of the law and of the management plan occurred" and asking for assurance that this type of illegal action will not happen again in the GWNF. While the Forest Service did respond by phone and mail, there is still no clear indication that the problem has been properly addressed.
This is not the first instance of a District Ranger failing to comply with NEPA in a roadless area. In 1991, the Dry River Ranger authorized volunteers to clear a 1 1/2 mile overgrown logging road in the Skidmore Fork Roadless Area while the area was being evaluated for its wilderness potential. In another case, the Dry River Ranger allowed hang gliders to clear a take-off point about an acre in size at the top of Reddish Knob. This clearing was done in a biologically sensitive area where the endangered cow knob salamander is found; once again, no scoping notice was sent out, and NEPA was violated.
State Bear Management Policy Questioned by Sierra Club
by Lynn Cameron
A concern for the population status of black bears in Virginia has prompted the Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club to write to the Virginia Dept. of Game and Inland Fisheries asking for "immediate action to substantially reduce and effectively limit the legal kill of black bears". There are a number of causes for alarm concerning the long-term viability of black bears in Virginia:
- The 1991 Black Bear Chase Season Report by Dennis Martin, state bear biologist, warns that bear populations may be experiencing excessive hunting pressure. Bear harvests have climbed steadily since 1982 (except for 1990 and 1992) to a record kill of 789 in 1993. The 1993 kill is particularly alarming considering the Report gives a high-side estimate that 770 new bears are added each year. The legal bear kill for 1993 is higher than the estimated annual recruitment!
- The VDGIF surveys show that virtually every bear hunter with dogs uses radio tracking equipment to locate the dogs. This increased efficiency, rather than presence of a greater number of bears, may account for higher harvest numbers.
- Poaching of black bears remains a significant problem in Virginia, but the impact of poaching on Virginia's bear population is unknown and has not been considered from a management perspective.
- The new bear dog training season adds stress to the bear population and increases the efficiency of the hunt during kill season.
- Mortality of oaks caused by gypsy moth defoliation will undoubtedly reduce the amount of mast available to bears, adding more stress to the bear population.
Membership
Membership in the VWC is open to anyone who believes in the need for preservation of wilderness. To join, send a copy of a recent letter supporting wilderness written to a public official, OR send $5.00 or more per year to the VWC Treasurer, address below. Thank you.The date opposite your name on the mailing label indicates when (month & year) you last made a contribution to VWC. Please check it and if the date is more than one year old, a new contribution from you will be warmly welcomed.
Officers
PRESIDENT Lynn Cameron 95 Hope St., Harrisonburg, VA 22801 (703) 434-1318
VICE PRES Dan French 107 Merry Acres Dr., Madison Heights, VA 24572 (703) 845-1605
TREASURER Julie Simpson P.O. 11 E Monmouth, Winchester, VA 22601-4647 (703) 662-7043
SECRETARY Charles Pierce 211 Evening Lane, Winchester, VA 22603 (703) 667-3184